Question Proposed on LinkedIn: Must you include your address on the resume?

Others’ Responses:

- The resume screener/recruiter/manager wants to know if you are a local candidate or not. By listing a full address, it makes it at least a bit more credible that you are. It is easiest to screen people out who don’t appear to be local if the company does not want to bother with relocation and out of state interviews.

- I have seen many resumes that don’t include a residential address. Many resumes were from local candidates applying for jobs within a few miles from their homes, and for lower level positions that would not offer relocation. I have been told some reasons that employees do not indicate a residential address is that they fear discrimination if they live in a less than desirable locale; for example, the inner city. One person told me that if she lists her apartment number as part of her address, it gives the impression that she is not as successful as other candidates who may own their own homes (discounting the fact that other candidates may be renting). Some people simply believe that in the digital age, electronic means of communication prevail, and a residential address only takes up space on a resume that can include more pertinent information regarding the applicant’s qualifications. Last, some people do fear that by revealing where they live, they put their own personal safety at risk. Whether these reasons are justified is debatable; nevertheless, they exist.

- You ask—-why you must include your address in your resume. The answer seems clear. So the company receiving it can weed out those resumes that are not local, or not within the distance acceptable to them. Sounds a bit discriminatory, and illegal. It is both. For those companies who do not practice the above, an address in the resume is used for verification in the Background Check, and for the mailing of the Thank You for applying letter that all companies mail out to every applicant.

- When I screen resumes and see missing information, it actually raises a red flag for me. I am old-school and expect a resume to be complete. When there is no address, especially no town and state, I often wonder what the applicant has to hide. I will review an applicant’s background and consider his or her qualifications if he or she does not include an address, but subconsciously, I may give greater consideration to an applicant who included his or her address on the resume.

- As someone who recruits, I do appreciate having the applicant’s full address. For one thing, it allows me to provide them with specific map directions to our location. Could they plug it in themselves? Sure. But I know the idiosyncracies of our area and depending on where they are coming from, I can provide them with better directions than their nav system might. I do also like to know how far they are going to have to commute to work, so that if it is a fairly long commute, I can address that with them in my initial interview. Lastly, having an address allows me to clarify with out of town candidates what their plans are for relocation, and to provide them with information about how we handle relocation for the position for which they applied. My personal opinion - if a company is going to screen you out based on your address, you probably don’t want to work for them anyway.

- I suppose that during the telephone screening or intial interview, you can ask such questions as “Will you have a reasonable commute to and from work?” and “If you were to take this job, would you require relocation?” Hopefully, applicants would reply truthfully, which we know is not always the case. In the real scheme of things, I do not know of any legal reason to include a residential address on a resume. For many organizations, applicants complete an electronic employment application and information on the application is populated by information from the resume. At some point, the applicant will complete an application, either electronically or on paper, and he or she will have to indicate his or her address whether or not it appears on the resume. The application becomes a legal document in the employment relationship.

- Clearly address is not a requirement, but as indicated……….it is suspicious when not included, just like when one does not include which college they attended when they have 25 years of excellent work accomplishment. When I review a resume, I look for best candidate, and do not concern myself with the candidate’s home location or potential relocation costs. But I know that is not true for many people who review applications.

- Jay, I COMPLETELY agree with you. Anyone who screens out a candidate is a POOR recruiter, and lazily going through their job, in my opinion. I thought that the job of a recruiter or sourcing specialist was to find the best candidates for a particular job. Whether or not the candidate is willing to relocate should not be pertinent at the initial screening. But I know that it happens. Why?? Because it is easier that way, and recruiters can roll through ther jobs that way. Maybe a company cannot pay for relocation, but then again maybe the candidate is not looking for relocation expenses to be paid. But if it is the right candidate and the right opportunity, I always approached by telling candidates that for the right person, we can always figure out the right details. I also agree with what was said earlier that anyone who eliminates a candidate because they have not included an address is probably not a company or a recruiter with whom I want to work. It says a lot to me. Lastly, it is distressing that recruiters are so lazy to use this as an opportunity to screen out candidates, but then again reality also tells us that age and other criteria is also used in screening out candidates. And not skills, experience etc. which should be the REAL criteria used.

- Recruiting is not an exact science, and the process is indluenced by subjectivity. Recruiters bring their own set of attitudes, beliefs, values, adn biases to their jobs. Although they should be objective, recruiters may very easily discount qualified candidates for consideration for a job. Discrimination is a reality in the recruitment process, and very often committed by the same indiviudals who should be fair and unbiases — HR professionals. As Mr. Hughes stated, age and other criteria are used when considering qualified candidates, and quite often, the most qualified candidates are passed over for very unfortunate reasons.

- I am in the camp that city and state should be good. Once you get to the interview stage you can provide full address then. With everyone posting resumes to different locations online I think of the security reasons for not having it on there. Then again you could add it to the resume you submit to specific companies and leave it off on others. I just feel overall it is a security risk. As for doing background checks, I sure hope you are not doing background checks prior to interviews and of course receiving the applicants permission.

- I’ve come across three reasons why applicants do not include an address. 1. The applicant does not have one. Basically the person is homeless. 2. The person had their identity stolen from an unscrupulous employment agency. This one truly shocked me but when I reflected upon how much information employment agencies obtain from an applicant I can understand their hesitancy. 3. There is a concern regarding the travel distance. My colleagues advised me of occasions where shortly after an employee accepts a position the travel becomes too much of a problem and has to resign or employees ask for salary adjustment due to travel which they cannot do. There are inclement weather issues, as well. I worked at a Law Firm years ago where an employee, who lived out of state, was absent when it rained or snowed. I don’t mean blizzard or torrential rain conditions where anyone would have a problem. As an FYI, I recall interviewing someone with a New York Address but whose recent employment experience was in Florida. I reckoned the person recently moved. During the interview I determined that the candidate was still living and working in Florida, was using a family members New York address until she found a job in New York.

- I also can recall many years ago during a job interview, the company asked me about how long my commute would be based on them seeing the address on the Resume, and questioned if that was too long of a commute. That was at a Fortune 100 company—who should know better about proper interview questioning.

- My belief is that people should consider the commute when they interview for a job. I also believe that professionals are more likely to work further from home, than indiviudals working in lower level positions. Professionals should be more aware that commute time can make a work day much longer, and be prepared for such traffic and travel difficulities (e.g., inclement weather, public transportation logistics, traffic patterns, toll delays). Unfortunately, not every prospective employee gives due consideration to the commute, and it becomes troublesome after he or she takes a job. A candidate can give the interviewer every assurance that he or she would have no difficulty getting to work (with the exception of extreme traffic or weather conditions), but many times, that isn’t the case.

- I once had an employee move his residence much further from the work site whie employed with the organization. The commute became difficult for him, and he expected the employer to excuse his frequent tardiness and accommodate a flex schedule for him, even though a flex schedule wasn’t practical for his position. He complained so often about the commute, that someone finally reminded him that he was the one who moved, and the company didn’t move and expect him to travel further. My point is that anyone can move at any time while working for the same employer at the same job location. Regardless, the employee must consider the commute and make a decision about maintaining the employment relationship. If the decision is to stay employed, then the employee has to make the adjustments necessary to ensure an acceptable attendance record. If the employer is able to make accommodations to assist the employee, that’s great, but accommodations aren’t always possible.

- I honestly believe that we should be treating applicants as adults. Whether or not the individual has a long commute, is NOT my concern. It is the candidate’s cconcern and he/she needs to determine whether or not they want to make a lengthy commute daily, or weekly, or whatever. My ONLY concern is whether or not the individual can do the job. Period that’s it!! But as pointed out previously, LAZY recruiters will often eliminate candidates because of their address, as opposed to determining if the individual has the skills to do the job, thereby “short changing” the employer, but then again most hiring managers will never know this, because the recruiter will only suppply the hiring manager with resumes of those that he/she has determined is the “right fit”. For many years, I have encountered (flat out) lazy recruiters who believe that his/her job is to eliminate people out of a mix of resumes, rather than taking on the laborious task of actually determining the best qualified candidates for a particular job. To many, many recruiters it is a numbers game (and yes I do mean game). Address, based on my experience, tells me NOTHING about a person except where they MAY or MAY NOT be residing at the time of submission of one’s resume. (Note: I have seen NUMEROUS cases where someone will use a relative’s address to make it appear that he/she resides close to the employer’s site.) An applicant’s address is much lke a “professional objective”, a complete waste of time. It adds nothing to a candidate’s skills and abilities to perform a job. Again, just my 2 cents!!

- I have worked with employees who have communed 50 to 100 miles to work, and did that for many years with no impact on the company. I recently met someone who accepted a job more than 6 hours away from home and has , for the last few years, followed the same routine of living near the place of work during the week and coming home on weekends. The only concern for the employer is—can he be here during work hours.

- Whether a candidate has or does not have an address on a resume is not the biggest issue for me. An address or no address is simply a matter of preference and rests in the “eyes of the beholder” much like the choice of resume style (functional or chronological). I don’t automatically assume the person is homeless or trying to pull the wool over my eyes. As John Hughes stated, I treat all candidates like adults. Whether I remain consistently objective as I review a resume or screen a candidate is my priority. This ensures that I treat each candidate fairly in my screening and selection process. A review of the resume generally informs me of the primary geographical locations the person has lived and worked. Once I determine that the candidate is a great fit for the opportunity, I move to a phone screen where I learn more about person (which often includes learning about where the person is located) and, in turn, may lead to inviting the person in for an in-person interview.

- More important are other issues such as removing Soc Sec number from the New Hire Application, removing dates of graduation from schools, moving background approval signoff off the Application to separate form as required by law, and removing reference names authorization approval. There is no reason why an Application that is copied and perhaps sent to many people in the interview process should have access to this information. Any information that is needed for the FINAL candidate can be collected at that time. I for one, will never provide references ahead of time—-I do not want my references to be abused by calls when the job is not final.

- Hi Jay, I agree with you comment about availability to the organization, nor do I believe that operating remotely is advantageous, just possible. It is (in my humble opinion) always preferable to be “on the ground” but this is not possible all the time. That having been said, I, personally, believe that the best way to monitor an organization is by “walking round” and will always believe in this method. But when you have remote facilities across the globe, this is not always possible. “Open door” works best when employees (ALL employees, including but not limited to the CEO, CFO, etc.) know that you are approachable and within eye sight. But you are correct in that not all activities can be done remotely all of the time. Being there is much better that a phone call or Skype or the like.

My Response:

- You only need to put your name, city/state, phone number and email address on top of your resume. In some scenarios like freelance or design work, you can put a website link to your portfolio. I’ve also seen some executives who incorporate a LinkedIn address on top as well.